For maneuverability of the warheads, I was focusing more on them being able to adjust to a shifting target location, not avoiding SAMs. I don't think decoys and

For maneuverability of the warheads, I was focusing more on them being able to adjust to a shifting target location, not avoiding SAMs. I don't think decoys and other countermeasures to ABM defences are currently relevant to non-ICBM platforms for the near future. I think that the bigger issue with protecting the CVBGs isn't DF-21/26 but that lack of missile magazine depth and reloading. We can't even fill most of the VLS we have now, and as you mentioned, it'd be pretty simple to degrade our AD with threats that require a response but aren't as dangerous. And since replenishment at sea for VLS is not currently practiced, ships would have to cycle through Yokosuka (assuming it's still a functioning base after whatever the PLAN does) for reloads. And since we have relatively shortlegged "interceptors" for the CVNs, with shortlegged AAMs (as currently deployed), I wouldn't be surprised if the PLAN decides that ALCMs still have tremendous value. Hell, we don't even deploy with full airwings these days. At least the PLAN is pretty far behind in subs. For now.